I think everyone understands the connotation of the word gimmick, and that Bach’s post intended to trivialize techniques as “tricks or devices used to attract business or attention.” You have to be a much better snake-oil salesman to convince anyone that Bach’s statement “Techniques are gimmicks” could be construed as ‘Techniques are ingenious or novel mechanical devices.’

BTW…if you are going to support your argument citing definitions, the definition (without removing the word ‘device’) cannot be twisted to suit your needs. Also, your cited references 1a, and 1b clearly imply a physical device (GADGET) and thus are not applicable in the context of this discussion.

Software testing is a field of computer science, so when I use the term techniques in the context of software testing I imply the denotative meanings:

The systematic procedure by which a complex or scientific task is accomplished.
the body of specialized procedures and methods used in any specific field, esp. in an area of applied science.
technical skill; ability to apply procedures or methods so as to effect a desired result.
Conversely, heuristic implies experimentation, trial and error, speculative formulation serving as a guide in investigation or problem solving, rules of thumb, or educated guesses.

“Unlike algorithms, heuristics do not guarantee optimal, or even feasible, solutions and are often used with no theoretical guarantee.” – Dictionary of computing.

Your assertion that techniques are heuristic devices is false simply based on a comparison of the definitions of the 2 words. But, your assertion that techniques can be fallible is true. They are fallible in large part because the technical skill or ability to apply the procedures or methods to effect a desired result is lacking.
It seems to me that Bach and others simple assume that techniques imply intellectually brain-dead, step-by-step, rigid, and rudimentary procedures that provide little value.

Correct application of testing techniques requires not only critical thinking of the problem space, but also in-depth knowledge of the system under test (down to the code level).

So, we are in absolutely agreement that the skill and knoweldge of a professional tester is paramount to the success of any software testing effort. However, I assert that the correct application of established testing techniques by a professional tester is more effective in targeted testing as compared to trial-and-error, experimentation, or simple wild ass guess (SWAG) methods.

Think of it in these terms. A Marine Corps sniper is more effective than an untrained person who picks up a gun and fires wildly from their hip or over their head. The untrained person may get lucky, but smart money is on the sniper.

- Bj -

Friday, September 01, 2006 11:36 PM by I.M.Testy

[quote]

1 a : a mechanical device for secretly and dishonestly controlling gambling apparatus b : an ingenious or novel mechanical device : GADGET
2 a : an important feature that is not immediately apparent : CATCH b : an ingenious and usually new scheme or angle c : a trick or device used to attract business or attention

—Michael B.
Thursday, August 31, 2006 4:01 AM by Michael Bolton